In a recent article, The New York Times has unveiled that Nike is backing a study aimed at assessing the fitness levels of teenagers before and after they undergo hormone therapy for gender transition.
This initiative has sparked controversy, as it involves experimenting on adolescents to determine whether males possess inherent physical advantages over females. The study's origins trace back to the NCAA's 2012 trans inclusion policy, which allowed athletes to compete based on their "gender identity" rather than biological sex. At that time, the prevailing belief was that males on estrogen were more athletically akin to females than to males.
Jennifer Sey, the founder of XX-XY Athletics, raised concerns about Nike's involvement, questioning, "1. why is@Nikefunding research (yes we knew this already but here it is in the@nytimes) about how to disfigure and sterilize little boys sufficiently such that they retain male advantage but not so much that it would be unfair to girls?" This sentiment echoes a broader skepticism about the ethics and implications of such studies.
According to The Post Millennial, further research has led scientists to conclude that the perceived similarity between males on hormone therapy and females is due to early hormone-suppression therapy.
The New York Times article also highlights that recent evidence suggests athletic performance differences between males and females exist even before puberty, indicating that testosterone provides an advantage regardless of its current presence or absence in the body.
Joanna Harper, a trans scientist from Oregon Health & Science University, is quoted as saying, "The idea of retained advantage is something that has been postulated for maybe five years, and it's certainly true." Harper further elaborates, "The vast body of evidence suggests that men outperform women, but trans women aren't men. And so the question isn't, do men outperform women? The question is, as a population group, do trans women outperform cis women, and is so, by how much?" This perspective, however, raises questions about the fundamental definition of gender and the implications of categorizing trans women separately from men.
Harper is playing a significant role in leading the Nike-funded study, which ambitiously tracks the fitness of trans adolescents through a 10-step test before and after hormone therapy, conducted every six months over five years. The study's future, however, faces uncertainty due to President Trump's executive order banning medical sex changes for minors. Harper expressed concern to the Times, stating, "the current climate makes the study somewhat uncertain." While the Times author speculated that Harper referred to potential funding cuts, Harper clarified, "The study is being funded by Nike."
The study's continuation hinges on the ability to provide "gender-affirming care," as Harper noted, "If we can't perform gender-affirming care, then we can't bring people into the study." This situation underscores the ongoing debate over the ethics and implications of medical interventions for minors, as well as the broader societal discourse on gender identity and athletic fairness.
Login